Law as Politics: Chinese Litigants in Australian Colonial Courts

Abstract

The recent historiography of Chinese in Australia has emphasised their vigorous formation of a local identity and community even in the face of recurrent and expanding threats of exclusion from colonial life. In their ready embrace of legal remedies to redress what they saw as discrimination or other harms, the Chinese were exemplar colonial settlers who looked to the law to protect them. In colonial appeal courts, Chinese litigants challenged migration controls, contested convictions under opium restriction and gambling laws, sought equitable outcomes in property inheritance and challenged exclusionary regulation under the Factory Acts. In contrast to another kind of history of the Chinese in Australian law, as defendants in criminal prosecution, this article draws attention to the Chinese engagement in legal remedies as an assertion of their entitlement to recognition and fair play.

Made in Chinatown: Chinese Furniture Factories in Australia, 1880–1930

“…Further, this research presents a different view of Chinese opposition to discrimination. It demonstrates that there was staunch Chinese resistance to racism in the furniture industry, much like that stressed in recent histories of Chinese migration to Australia (Finnane, 2015). Even so, I also show that acquiescence was often the favoured or necessary strategy for Chinese furniture industry participants and their allies when facing anti‐Chinese measures.…”

Australia's Bankrupt Chinese Furniture Manufacturers, 1880–1930

“…I concentrate on the statements made by Chinese manufacturers themselves. While the majority of these statements were made in potentially intimidating courtroom settings, often through interpreters, and must, therefore, be treated with caution, they still permit unique insights into manufacturers' operations (Rhook, ; Finnane, ). As Loy‐Wilson () has pointed out, Chinese entrepreneurs reflecting on their own activities tended to ‘focus on the practicality’ of everyday business, rather than ‘the exotic’ and ‘whimsical detail’ that was typical with non‐Chinese reflections on Chinese enterprise.…”